News University | Today's most popular courses on NewsU, Poynter's e-learning site for journalists. |
| |
Webinars | Our online classroom is just a click away. Learn more. | |
|
|
 
Romenesko
Latest News
Reporting
& Writing
Ethics &
Diversity
Leadership
& Business
Visual
Journalism
Online &
Technology
TV &
Radio
Journalism
Education
|
Article Feedback
View all Romenesko feedback
Typical newspaper journo is a white, liberal, male boomer
(Read the Article)
Post Feedback |
Feedback Guidelines |
Report Feedback Abuse
Page 1 of 1
If this is true
Posted by
Johnny Morales
6/15/2005 2:24:51 PM
then those liberal white baby boomer journalists are a traitor to their kind. Considering the hardright slant of the news today. Their personal b...
then those liberal white baby boomer journalists are a traitor to their kind. Considering the hardright slant of the news today. Their personal beliefs and background seem to have little if any influence on what news is printed and how it is presented.
In days gone by perhaps this nonsense about there being a "liberal media" was partly true. It certainly makes a convenient way to explain the obsession the press had for Iran-Contra.
The Downing St. memos are far more important and significant than Iran Contra ever was, YET we hear almost nothing about. The news we do hear is not front page or highlighted.
The real irony is "liberal bias" doesn't mean that literally. Rather it refers to any effort to print news contrary to the neo-conservative view of the truth. It's become a generic slam by the establishment.
It's high time reporters realize how insulting this is and talk back.
USA Today/MEMO
Posted by
tina louise
6/8/2005 2:48:32 PM
Dear Jim,
I just read your piece about the USA Today article on the Downing Street Memo. I had actually just read it on the...
Dear Jim,
I just read your piece about the USA Today article on the Downing Street Memo. I had actually just read it on the USA Today site and wrote to them. It was one paragraph inparticular that made me more angered than the rest. The following is what I wrote to the paper and explains what I mean:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear editor,
In an article today concerning the lack of media attention to the Downing Street Memo, your paper published the following in the text:
[Robin Niblett of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, says it would be easy for Americans to misunderstand the reference to intelligence being ‘fixed around’ Iraq policy. ‘Fixed around' in British English means ‘bolted on’ rather than altered to fit the policy,” he says. ]
As an English woman living in England and having travelled greatly, I wish to correct you. 'Fixed around' in anybody's English means manipulated and made to fit - at no point in my 43 years of living have I heard it used to mean 'bolt on'. I think you are either assuming your readers are stupid, or are simply reluctant to admit to having gone along with the others in not reporting this story. I believe the media have an obligation to report on stories of such grave importance and am deeply disappointed. The only solution to everything is honesty.
Namaste
Tina Louise
big surprise
Posted by
Doug Jones
6/8/2005 11:08:42 AM
It should be obvious to all that nearly all of MSMers are big liberals. Look at the way they're pimping the so-called Downing Street Memos,...
It should be obvious to all that nearly all of MSMers are big liberals. Look at the way they're pimping the so-called Downing Street Memos, which have been completely discredited.
Culture of entitlement
Posted by
Rob Daniels
5/28/2003 2:28:26 AM
The Jayson Blair fiasco is not about race; it does highlight the culture of entitlement that permeates journalism. By that I mean a system that...
The Jayson Blair fiasco is not about race; it does highlight the culture of entitlement that permeates journalism. By that I mean a system that anoints young, well connected J-School types and simply hands them the best internships and the best jobs right out of college. These people don't have to earn it enough. Payment of dues is an alien concept to Jayson Blair et al. They rise to the top without working a single night cops shift, taking a single high school track call-in or proofreading a single obit. As a result, they are at risk of becoming egomaniacal, arrogant and sloppy.
Solution?
Posted by
Mitchell Owens
12/12/2002 1:20:43 PM
Perhaps a solution is for newspapers and other publications not make it mandatory that a new hire have a college degree or even any formal...
Perhaps a solution is for newspapers and other publications not make it mandatory that a new hire have a college degree or even any formal journalism background. The lack of a bachelor's degree held me back a number of times early in my career. But I wanted to be a reporter so I headed to alternative newspapers like the Dallas Observer, et cetera, where the editors believed that an ability to find a story and to then write it well were more important than brandishing a piece of parchment.
Overeducated? Overpaid?
Posted by
Mitchell Owens
12/12/2002 1:08:01 PM
So what's the solution to this supposed problem? Do newspaper editors purposefully send out a hiring announcement that they're looking for report...
So what's the solution to this supposed problem? Do newspaper editors purposefully send out a hiring announcement that they're looking for reporters who are undereducated, conservative, et cetera? Talk about profiling! Give me a break: A journalist is meant to come back with a story, the story, whatever his/her socioeconomic background, educational level, et cetera. That's the job. It's up to the reporter to figure out how to do it. Even if that means stepping aside so another reporter, whose presence would be more acceptable to a given community or a potential interview subject, can do the job. In the end, its all about getting the most accurate, well-told, insightful story. But coming back to your editor with an astonished comment like "Nobody would talk to me" just doesn't cut it.
Apples and oranges
Posted by
David Rheingold
12/10/2002 2:07:46 PM
One can fairly call journalists lots of things, but "overpaid" is not one of them.
Shaw compares pay at America's largest papers to that of...
One can fairly call journalists lots of things, but "overpaid" is not one of them.
Shaw compares pay at America's largest papers to that of the general population. Big difference.
Had he included reporters at small- and mid-sized papers, the discrepancy would not be so glaring. Or if he limited the comparison to big-city reporters and their urban brethren, those salaries would not seem so outrageous. (The median income is $47,030 in Manhattan and $55,221 in San Francisco.)
The big question is why, with such an overeducated news media, such sloppy reporting can make its way into print.
Amy Alexander, media columnist
Posted by
Amy Alexander
12/9/2002 11:00:38 AM
Thank you, David Shaw. Funny, though, how the editors quoted in the story about the growing "disconnection" between journalists and regular folk...
Thank you, David Shaw. Funny, though, how the editors quoted in the story about the growing "disconnection" between journalists and regular folk didn't comment on what, if any, measures they're planning to take to lessen the gap between their over-educated, over-entitled staffs and their readers. (Perhaps they did, and Shaw didn't include those particular comments.) In any case, this is a HUGE problem in the newsrooms at most mainstream papers, particularly in the big cities: In the newsroom at one large Northeast paper, for example, I know of a recent incident in which a cop reporter from the metro desk metro desk was sent into a predominantly black neighborhood to get community react after a cop shot an unarmed black citizen; this reporter returned to the newsroom empty-handed, saying, "No one out there would talk to me." Now, I ask you, what kind of reporter -- black or white -- would fail at such a task? Maybe the kind who has little or no personal experience communicating with folks in such neighborhoods? Probably. But a bigger question is, How does such a reporter even get HIRED to cover cops? What this means, on a daily basis, is precisely what Shaw describes: a plethora of "news" and "feature" stories that are superficial and virtually meaningless to the many Joe and Janes out there. Still, it would be nice to hear editors like Baron and Mims Rowe say they have strategies to begin closing this gap -- namely, by hiring fewer reporters who look and sound like they do (white, college-educated, middle class), and more who are smart, compassionate, curious, and savvy enough to know that good reporting hinges on the ability to mix it up with all kinds of folks -- CEOs, teachers, cops, and yes, the kinds of people who live in neighborhoods where cops sometimes shoot unarmed citizens. Journalism, after all, is a TRADE, one which at its best "comforts the afflicted." How about hiring more reporters -- B.A. or no -- who intrinsically understand this?
Page 1 of 1
View all Romenesko feedback
|
|
